CHRISTIANITY AS A REVEALED RELIGION: ITS SIMILARITIES AND
DISSIMILARITIES WITH OTHER WORLD RELIGION
Introduction
The claim that Christianity is a revealed religion is a long-standing one. A revealed
religion is a religion founded primarily on the revelation of God to humankind.
It could be referred to a religion based on the revelation by God to man of ideas that he
would not have arrived at by his natural reason alone or religion in which the existence
of God depends on revelation.
According to D.B Knox 1960, the manner and extent of revealed have been debated by
Christians without a clear consensus, but this only serve to highlight the “impressive
agreement of revelation” The claim goes back to the founders of Christianity. Christ and
his apostles and was not simply an invention of the last three countries thought up in
response to the lost of Christianity “self evident validity”
THE CONCEPT OF (CHRISTIANITY) REVELATION
The claim to be a revealed religion is made to distinguish Christianity from various other
religious systems which claim no origin outside of the created order, and which may be
(pejoratively) described as man made Christian theology claim not to be the
accumulation of accident wisdom – mankind’s best thought on the topic of the day –
nor it an exercise in religious safe expression “the idea behind the word” “revelation” is
the disclosure of something previously unknown to claim Christianity is a reviewed
religion is to set it apart from the Aristotelian idea of an mactive God, discovered
through augmentation usually, it also refers to an active deity involved in a purposeful
act revealing, rather than a passive God who allows himself/itself to be reviewed
integral to the Christian claim is that God himself is both the agent and the object of
revelation.
What, is it is claimed, is reviewed about God is not exhaustive knowledge it is not
possible to know everything about the Christian’s God it is however possible to know
truly, without knowing exhaustively. It has been suggested that we cannot know God
as He in Himself but only as we experience/it. This is a false antithesis there is no
reason why knowledge granted in relation to something should be merely relative
unreal. We may have no access to the inner been of God but all this beans is that the
initiative remains with Him to reveal something of Himself if He chooses.
So, revelation is the deliberate and active disclosure by God of something previously
unknown which communicate real but not exhaustive knowledge.
Christianity: how God reveals.
Revelation means the whole work of God making Himself known to men and women,
the theme embraces on the one hand, all the words and the deeds of God in which the
biblical writers recognize his self-disclosure, and, on the other hand, all that is involved
in the encounter through which God bring successive generations to know him through
knowledge of the biblical fact “this statement packer brings to out attention four areas
of revelation. We will look at each in turn to discover of the meaning of the claim.
THE DEEDS OF GOD
There are two specific types of God’s work. The first is the whole area of what is know
as general revelation (we will leave the other type, Gods action is redemptive history,
until the next section where they will be dealt with more fully under the heading of the
words of God). General revelation is that revelation which is potentially available all
people every where classically, there are three areas of general revelation in which God
works to reveal Himself and His purpose in man, in nature and in history.
“God has revealed Himself to all men in the conflict of their moral experience “a sense
of right and wrong, a sense of punishment and reward are appropriate to each and
internal” there is biblical support for His argument, particularly Roman 1:2. mankind,
being made in the image of God (Gen. 1:27) bears some marks of God’s character
within itself relational personhood, a reactivity and other human attribute may also
suggest similarities with the creator.
“The greatness and beauty of created thing gives us corresponding idea of the creator”
(wisdom of Solomon 12:5) something of God’s character is muttered in His creation, not
just in mankind, but also in nature. This was one of Paul’s points of contact with his
pagan audiences. At Lystra for example, he point out that God has “not left Himself
without testimony” but have reveled his kindness in His provision of rain, crops, food
and seasons (Act 14:17). Psalm 19 speaks of the heaven’s themselves (the sky full of
stars, the heat and light of the son etc) constantly declaring the glory of God to all.
This, according to Paul, points clearly to God’s existence and power (Romans 1:18-21)
so that “even unlettered and stupid folk cannot plead the excuse of ignorance. There is
no spot in the universe where you cannot discern at least some sparks of his glory”.
Some hold that the cause of history also displays something of God’s nature. Not just in
the rise and fall of nations but in the smaller-scale providential act of God, we may
discern his hand evidently. This is a much more difficult task, as Psalm 107 points out
the following which Calvin commends that the, “to weigh the works of God wisely is a
matter of rare and singular wisdom”
The discipline of natural theology ceeks to formulate a doctrine of God of from such
general revelation, but on its own, it is an insufficient and potentially ambiguous source.
This is not a fault inherent in God’s work themselves or in general revelation objectively,
but one which arises in our subjectives appropriation of the revelation. They deserve
among philosopher who have attempted to describe the God revealed in this way is
shameful, because trying to open trate in to heaven is useless unless out eyes are ’’it is
too pessimistic to any that general revelation does not register at all in the ’’sin
darkened mind of the unregenerate’’ and too optimistic to say it insufficient for
salvation. Rather, we must on balance affirm objectivity of the revelation along side its
limited utility mediating knowledge of God. Something of God can be passived by the
sense and grasped with the mind by observing God’s work, but it is always obscured by
the fatherless eyesight of our sinful nature. There is a possibility of a revelation, but
only if God chooses averred this defect in us.
Gods divinity and power are clearly seen, understood and made known to all, but the
murds of human beings are blinded (by sin) and they are resist and reject it moreover,
contemplation of God’s work in man, in nature and in history may well call attention to
a moral and spiritual defect in us, but it does not and cannot reveal a solution for it
.therefore, Christianity affirms the reality of truth revealed in this manner, but it also
affirms it limitations
THE WORDS OF GOD.
William Temple wished to retain the concept of Christianity as a revealed religion in his
book nature. Man and God. However, he sought to avoid linking revelation too closely
with scripture by claiming that ’’There is no such thing as revealed truths of revelation.
That is to say propositions when express the results of correct thinking concerning
revelation, but they are not in themselves directly revealed “what he wanted to avoid
was saying that God had spoken in some kind of verbal revelation and affirm instead
that God had revealed himself in certain events if the past. The special events like the
Exodus, the Exile and the cross of Christ constitute redemptive history, the main area of
God’s revelation. But in the oft-quoted words of Knox, “if revelation is in the event
rather than in the interpretation, revelation becomes like a nose of wax to be reshaped
according to every man’s whim” The sort of revealed religion would be left with of
Temple was correct would be susceptible to change with every passing season and we
would not be able to know God at all. The plan fact is that “no event itself interpreting”.
God must explain his actions in redemptive history. If they are to function as revelation.
Without his words to explain the significance of what he is doing we are left to grope in
the dark with only our best guesses to guide us to the divine.
God is truly concerned to reveal himself and does not simply “guide our minds into right
thoughts about Him as we watched Him in action. “His self-revelation is to important to
be left to such a blunt instrument. He has spoken though the prophets, though His son
and through His Apostle to explain and interpret His Mighty deeds. This is unmistakable
force of the phrase. “This says the Lord” found constantly on the lips of men like Moses
and Ezekiel, it is Peter’s in Act 10:42, that the Lord Jesus has commended him to
preach and to bear witness to specific truth about God’s purpose, and it is the clear
teaching of Jesus when he claimed that His words are not His own (John 7:16, 14-24)
not only those God explain Himself whenever He act (“surely the sovereign Lord does
nothing without reviling His plan to His servant, the prophets (Amos 3:7) but often
prefers those acts, even at long distance, by verbal predictions and explanations. How
Jeremiah or Malachi (for example) knew that the message they verbally delivered was
of God we are not told, but they were convinced and compelled to speak and acts as if
it were. At certain point in Israel’s history, signs and wonders accompanied the words
of the prophets (particularly Moses and Elijah) as a seal of authentication/confirmation
on their words. Even when this were not forthcoming however, God’s voice was
somehow recognized. This verbal revelation, mediated through the prophets. Is God’s
usual method of revelation in the Old Testament. Only once do the people of Israel
hear God’s voice unmediated and it so terrifies then that they beg Moses to never let it
happen again! (Exodus 20:18-19). Moreover, God speaking is itself an event in the
redemptive history even the creation was preceded by God’s instrumental “Let there be
high”. We cannot separate word and deed.
Encounter with God
“In the past God spoke to our forefathers through the prophets at many times and in
various ways, but in these days he has spoken to us by his son “(Hebrews 1:1-2). God
has not simply revealed himself in deeds, or even in words and deed together. His
definitive revelation was made personally in His son. To a particular group of people at
a particular time in history, God revealed himself in human form. As Jesus himself told
his Apostle Philip. “Anyone who has seen me has seen the Father” (John 14:9).
Personal encounter with Christ, not just revelation in words or deed, is a distinctively
Christian revelation. Such personal encounters did not cease with Christ ascension. In
Acts, Luke describes how Jesus continued to encounter men and women though his
Spirit (Act 1:1 with the implication that volume 2 is about the continuing acts of Jesus).
The apostle Paul describes his own personal encounter with Christ thus “when God….
Was pleased to reveal his Son in me” (Galatians 1:15-16).
The aspect of divine revelation has been stressed in recent years. It is said that
revelation is personal, not propositional. So, William Temple can affirm that, :What is
offered to man’s apprehension in any specific Revelation is not truth concerning God
but the living God himself”. This however, is just another evasion of verbal revelation.
For, in the words of Leon Morris, “How can we know God unless we know something
about him?” This idea that revelation is more personal than propositional is another
manifestation of the twentieth century’s obsession with the idea of personality and
relationship it false to release however that relationship require propositional content to
function. “Revelation is certainly more than the giving of theological information, but it
is not and cannot less. To say that revelation is non-propositional is actually to
depersonalize it “It is a wonderful truth that God Loves us and wants to enter into a
personal relationship with each one of us, but if he cannot speak we have a dumb
“Lover God who makes no declaration”
Personal encounter with God is vital to revelation, but it does not usually occure in the
absence of verbal communication of some kind indeed, the usual means of experiencing
God is through his word. Revelation is not just the broadcasting of divinely guaranteed
information, but a personal confrontation. When we meet his word, we meet God and
are called to respond to Him as the author of that word.
OBJECTIVE REVELATION SUBJECTIVE APPROPRIATION
Despite the many and various ways in which Christianity can be seen as a revealed
religion. It does not claim that the mechanism of revelation is an automatic one. We
cannot compel God to speak and our part in the process is by no means unimportant.
The revelation is real but not coercive. “One of the many divine qualities of the Bible is
this, that it does not yield the secrets to the irreverent and censorious”. Profitable
appropriate of revelation requires illumination through faith. Only then can it be
accepted and become true revelation.
THE VALIDITY OF THE CLAIM
We have been considering the validity and coherence of the claim that Christianity is a
revealed religion throughout this essay. Different theories have been examined as to
the manner and extent of that supposed revelation, and we have been examined the
validity of those which seek to modify the traditional position.
Is the claim to have any revelation at all a valid one? Whether it is a true claim or not.
It or not, it is certainly a strong possibility. For the atheist there is no God and
therefore there can be no revelation. For the agnostic, if there is a God, he is unable or
unwilling to speak clearly. If however we may assume that there is a God is it valid to
claim he has revealed anything? Several fact suggest that it is.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
A supreme God “must necessarily be able to reveal himself”
“A deliberate total self-effacement on God’s part would be a denial of love”
The kind of revelation we posses is of as kind to be expected
Our own personal/relational nature might indicate a similar divine attribute
issuing in revelation with the purpose of establishing relationship.
It is the only adequate explanation for Christianity
It is the only adequate explanation for the distinctiveness of Old Testament
religion.
It is the best explanation of the chains of the prophets of Christ and of the
apostles
It is the best explanation for the Church’s claim to revelation
Christianity is a revealed religion. We have exploited the meaning of the claim. It is a
value one and indeed a true one. Therefore, let us not forget the words of Packer
“God’s purpose in revelation is to make friends with us”
Christianity vs religion
“In the past God spoke to our forefathers through the prophets at many times and
various ways, but in these last days, he has spoken to us by his son (Jesus) whom he
appointed been of all things, and through whom he made the universe.
Karl Bath was lecturing to a group of students at puneclon. One student asked the
renewed German theologian. “Sir, don’t you think that God has revealed himself in
other religions and not only in Christianity?” Bath’s answer stunned the crowed. With a
modest thunder he answered. “No, God has not revealed himself in any religion,
including Christianity. He has revealed himself in his Son (Jesus)
People by nature are religious in that every person is born with a sense of divine being
and at some point each person decides whether to accept that belief, enquire into it, or
reject it. Many choose the belief, as the saying goes that “all roads lead to Rome” and
all religions lead to God. Not true.
In one sense religion is man’s search for God primarily through hid own efforts, or
through a man-made religion. On the other hand, Jesus (or real Christianity) is God’s
search for man. And that makes all the difference in the world. Because we all sinners,
it is impossible for us to save ourselves through our own efforts or any man-made
religion. This is why God in his eternal love for us, sent his own Son, Jesus Christ to die
on the cross in our place to pay the penalty for our sins. Mankind’s salvation is thus
found in Jesus Christ alone. There is no other way.
Narrow? Yes. But had there been any other way why would Jesus come to earth as a
man to die an excruciating death on a Roman cross to pay the penalty for our sins? As
Jesus said, “Small is the gate and narrow the road that leads to life and only a few find
it.
So the important question is not are you religion? Or, do you belong to Christianity
denomination, or are you a member of a Christian Church, but have you accept Jesus
as your Saviour? Is you trust in him and him alone for your eternal salvation? As Jesus
said “I am the way the truth and life. No one comes to the father (God) except through
me”
Christianity: similarities and dissimilarities with other world religion
Similarities and dissimilarities between Christianity and other religions are well elaborate
Him below. In each religion, the differences and beliefs are clearly elucidated.
-
Relationship with Islam
Islam shares a number of beliefs with Christianity. They share similar views on
monotheism, judgment, heaven, hell, spirits, angels and a future resurrection. Jesus is
acknowledge and respected by Muslims as a great prophet. However, while Islam
relegates Jesus to a lesser status than God “in the company of those nearest to God” in
the Qurian mainstream (Trimtanan) Christianity teaches without question that Jesus is
God the Son of the three Hypothesis (common English person) of Christianity Holy
Trinity, equally God as are God the father and the Holy Spirit.
The religion both share a belief in the virgin birth of Jesus, his miracles and healings,
and that he ascend bodily into heaven. However, Jesus is not accepted as the son by
Muslims, who strictly maintain that he was a human being who was love by God and
exalted by God to ranks of the most religious. They believe in God as a single entity,
not as the Trinity accepted by the vast majority of Christians. Neither do Muslims accept
Jesus crucifixion. Since Muslims believe only in the worship of a strictly monotheistic
God who never assumed human flesh, they do not accept the use of icons and see this
as shirk (idolatry). Muslims influence played a part in the initiation of iconoclasm and
their conquest caused iconoclasm in the Byzantine Empire for the same reason, they
do not worship or pray to Muhammad, Jesus or any other prophets, only to God.
-
Relationships with Hinduism
Buddhism, Hinduism and Christianity differ on fundamental beliefs on heaven, hell and
reincarnation, to name a few. From the Hindu perspective, heaven (Sanskrit syatga)
and hell (Naraka) are temporary places where every soul has to live, either for the good
deeds done or for their sins committed.
There also exist significant similarities in Christian and Hindu theology, most notably in
that both religions present a Trinitarian view of God. The Holy Trinity of Christianity
consisting the Father, Son and the Holy Ghost is sometimes seen as roughly analogous
to the trimuria of the Hinduism, whose members ---Brahma. Vishnu and Shiva are seen
as the three principal manifestations of Brahma or Godhead.
In Hinduism (also in Jainism and Sikhism) theology, most notably in that both he
concept of moksha is akin to that of Buddhism nirvana, as well as Christianity’s doctrine
of salvation
Christian Hindu relations are mixed affair. On one hand, Hinduism natural tendency has
been to recognize the divine basis of various other religions and to revere their founder
and saintly practitioners. On the other hand, perceptions of aggressive proselytism on
the part of some Christian groups have lead to occasional meidents of anti-Christ
violence, often fueled by Hindu nationalist political parties. In western countries,
Vedanta has influenced some Christian thinkers, while other in the anti – cult movement
have reacted against the activities of immigrant gurus and their followers (See also
Pierre Johan’s Abhishiktananda Bede Guffiths. Dalit theology).
-
Relationship with Buddhism
Buddhism and Protestantism came into political conflict in 19th century Sir Lanka and
inflict 1904 (the Francis young husband expedition). Various events have cooperation of
western spiritual seekers (including Catholic religious). Relations are generally good
between both religions, except perhaps in South Korea. The Russians republic of
Kalmykia recognized both Tibetan/Lamarst Buddhism and Russians Outodoxy as its
official religions.
POSSIBLE RELATIONSHIP WITH ZOROASTRIANISM THROUGH JUDAISM
Mainly scholars believe the eschatology of Judaism and possibly the idea of e originated
in Zoroastrianism and many have been transferred to Judaism during the Babylonian
captivity, thus eventually influencing Christian theology Bible scholar P.R Ackroyd states
“the whole eschatological scheme, however of the last judgment, rewards and
punishment, etc. within which immorality is achieved, is manifestly Zoroastrian in origin
and inspiration”. However, the theory is questioned by other mainstream historians and
scholars. The Oxford History of the Biblical World states “There is little if any effect of
Zoroastrian elements on Judaism in the Persian period” Nevertheless scholars such as
Solomon Nigosian contend, in regarding the similar ideas of Zoroaster and later Jewish
writers, that “the ideas were indigenous to Iran… it is hardly conceivable that some of
the characteristics ideas and practices in Judaism, Christianity and Islam came into
being without Zoroastrian influence” the new faith (Zoroastrianism) enmerged in larger
Persian empires “Zoroastrianism reflect the cosmopolitan society of the empires”.
During this time Zoroastrianism profoundly effected the beliefs and values of Judaism.
Christianity and Islam (“Traditions & Encounters: A brief global History” Jerry II Bentley
Pg (93). It is also possible that Zoroastrianism and Jewish theology came from in
common source.
Similarities with the Christian Trinity can be seen between Ahura Mazda and God the
father, Mithra and Christ the logos, as well as between Burz and the Holy Spirit, both of
which are associate symbolically with water both Zoroastrianism and Christianity
consider themselves to be monotheistic, but like all other monotheisms they have
highlighted certain aspects or energies or the divine to emphasize, and this are not
meant to be interpreted as separate divinities. In both religions they are guardian
Angels, of fravashi, which are considered to be created beings and are distinct from the
energies of God or divine emanations. The Zoroastrian term Yazata, however has
variously be interpreted as meaning emanations or
‘spark” of the divine, or as
being toughly synonymous with the term “angels”. There have been various theories on
the prevailed relationship between these aspect of Zoroastrianism and ideas of divine
emanation in esoteric Christianity, Jewish Kabalah, Islamic mysticism (Surfism) and
other religious system such as Gnosteism, Yazidism, and the Dinze among others.
Relationship with Mithraism and so invictus
There are many parallels between Mithraism, the religion of so invictus, and the
Christianity amelian is behaved to have establish the Dics Nathalies. Souls invicts (day
of the death of sol invetures) as an animal festival held on the day when the sun’s daily
declination visibly starts rising again after the winter solstree, namely on December
25th, the birth of the central figure was this thus celebrated on the day which Christian
later use to celebrate Jesus’s birth (having always celebrate this at Epiphany). Other
similarities include the story of Christ and the Mithra as children being visited by
shepherdeds, the trinity, and the immortal soul Sunday itself was impose as the official
day of rest by constanting, who referred to it as the day of the Veanerable Sun
(Although Christian worshipped on Sunday from at least 150 years before constanting) .
Some writers of Christian apologetics have agued that, because the Gospels where
written before 100 and little is know of Roman Mithraism until after 100, it is not
possible to definitively state that Christianity borrowed any of it doctrines from
Mithraism legal research. Some have even suggested it is more likely the flow was the
other way Christian apologist Ronal II Nash stated.
Allegation of an early Christian depended on Mithraism have been rejected on many
grounds. Mithraism had no concept of the death and the resurrection of it god and no
place for any concept rebirth… at least during it early stages. During the early stage of
the cult, the motion of rebirth would have been foreing to its basic out look. Moreover,
Mithraism was basically military cult. Therefore, one must skeptically about suggestions
that it appealed to non military people like the early Christian.
RELATIONSHIP WITH THE BABA’S FAITH
The Baba’s faith believes that there is one God who sent divine messengers to guide
humanity throughout time, which is called progressive revelation (Christian). They
believe in the divine knowledge and the essence of Jesus, among other messengers
such as Muhammad, Zoroaster, and Moses interpretations vary, but the Baba’s faith is
sometimes considered an Abrahamic faith. The followers of the Baba’s faith believe in
God, as do Christians, and recognize Jesus’ teachings, but they have different views of
the trinity and divinity of Jesus. The Baba’s view of prophets is that although they have
both human and divine characteristics, they are not themselves God, but rather “divine
manifestations”. They also see the trinity as symbolic where Jesus and the Holy Spirit
are polished mirrors that reflect the pure light from God.
Baba is share some views with Christianity regarding moral and immoral behaviour.
Baba is condemn polygamy premarital sex, and the homosexual act while treating every
one, including homosexuals, with love, respect and dignity.
RELATIONSHIP WITH SCIENTOLOGY
Hubbard described scientology as “the western Angheized continuans of many eater
forms of wisdom “Hubbard includes the teachings of Jesus among belief systems cited
as this” earthen form of wisdom Jesus is recognize in scientology as part of it “religious
heritage” though “is seen as only one of many good teachers”.
In the 2008 book vintage Jesus. Timeless answers to timely questions, authors mark
Driscoll and the Gerry Basilicas write “according to scientology, Jesus is an “implant”
forced upon a Thetan about a million years ago” and Jack Huberman writes in 101
people who are really screwing America that in scientology Jesus is seen as having been
“implanted in humanity collective memory”by the character Xenu from scientology
space opera.
References
1.
I Berkof Systematic Theology (Edimburg Banner of Truth 1958)
2.
J Calvin Institute of the Christian Religion (Philadelphia Westminister Frees
1960)
3.
B.A Demarest “Revelation General” in evangelical Dictionary of Theology
(Caishsle Paternoster, 1984)
4.
W.H Guffith Thimas. The principles Of Theology (Guildford Theological Vine
Books 1960)
5.
C.F.H Henry “Revelation, Special” in Evangelical Dictionary of Theory (Cailist
Paternoster 1984)
6.
D.B Knox. “Propositional Revelation
Theological Review Feb. 1960 (XIXI)
the
Only
Revelation”
Reformed
7.
A.E McGrath, Christian Theory, an introduction (Oxford Blackwell’s 1994)
8.
B Milne, Know the truth (Leicester IVP, 1982)
9.
l Morris. I Believe in revelation (London holder and Stoughton 1976)
10.
J.I Packer “Revelation” a new Bible Dictionary 2 (Leicester IVP, 1982)
11.
J.I Packer God has spoken (London Holder and Stoughton 1993).
12.
C.H Pinnock “Revelation” a new Dictionary of theory (Leicester IVP 1983).
13.
R. Swinburne Revelation from metaphor to analogy (Oxford clarendion 1992)
14.
W Temple nature, God, and man (London 1934)